Doctor accused of rape: GP claimed he used saliva to carry out pelvic exam

Soon after he was arrested on suspicion of raping a patient during a late-night consultation in 2015, a general practitioner told police that he had put his saliva onto his fingers before inserting them into her for an examination.

Wee Teong Boo, 67, told the High Court on Friday (May25) that saliva has "anti-bacterial properties", although he admitted there was no excuse for using spit as lubricant during a digital examination.

On the 10th day of Wee's trial, the prosecution sought to highlight discrepancies between his statements and the version he gave in court.

He is charged with molesting the woman, then a 23-year-old student, at his Bedok clinic on Nov 25, 2015, and raping her on Dec 30, 2015.

In the statements - taken on Dec 31, 2015 and Jan 1, 2016 - Wee told investigators that he had used his saliva as lubricant. In court, he testified that he had not used any lubricant.

On Friday, Wee said his statement was the correct version.

This prompted Deputy Public Prosecutor Sharmila Sripathy-Shanaz to ask: "Isn't saliva full of bacteria?" Wee replied: "It has anti-bacterial properties."

He is charged with molesting the woman, then a 23-year-old student, at his Bedok clinic on Nov 25, 2015, and raping her on Dec 30, 2015.

In the statements - taken on Dec 31, 2015 and Jan 1, 2016 - Wee told investigators that he had used his saliva as lubricant. In court, he testified that he had not used any lubricant.

On Friday, Wee said his statement was the correct version.

This prompted Deputy Public Prosecutor Sharmila Sripathy-Shanaz to ask: "Isn't saliva full of bacteria?" Wee replied: "It has anti-bacterial properties."

Pressed for authoritative sources, the doctor said it was "general knowledge" and told the DPP she could do an internet search.

However, the DPP contended that Wee's entire account of carrying out a digital examination to rule out pelvic inflammatory disease was a lie.

The DPP put it to Wee that he had raped the woman and was worried that his DNA would be found inside her.

That was why he concocted an "elaborate story" of conducting a digital examination with ungloved fingers and saliva as a lubricant - to provide an explanation for any of his DNA that may be found, the DPP said.

"You never did any digital examination," said the DPP, pointing out that there was no mention of any examination of the woman's genital area in Wee's case notes.

Wee disagreed.

The DPP also contended that Wee's defence that he had erectile dysfunction was an "afterthought". Wee disagreed.

Wee had consulted a urologist in private practice on Jan 5, 2016, three days after he was released from the police lock-up.

"You were trying to find a way to get yourself out of a rape case," said the DPP.

In court, Wee said he was shocked to learn on Dec 31, 2015, that he was being accused of rape because he was suffering from erectile dysfunction.

However, the DPP pointed to Wee's Jan 1, 2016 statement, in which he had replied "no" when asked point blank if he had erectile dysfunction.

"So were you lying then or are you lying now?" the DPP asked.

Wee replied that the condition did not bother him.

The DPP pressed on, asking if he had "selective memory". "It can happen to anybody," Wee replied.

Details of the woman's account of how Wee allegedly molested her were also revealed in open court when the DPP wrapped up her cross-examination. The woman had testified behind closed doors.

The DPP put it to Wee that the woman visited him for gastric discomfort, and while examining her abdomen, Wee told her that there was lump in her groin area. Wee then slid his hand into her underwear and touched her genitalia, while asking "OK?".

The woman replied "OK" because there was no pain, the DPP said, adding that Wee continued touching her and asking her if it was OK.

The DPP put it to Wee that he was emboldened by what he had done to her on Nov 25 and that was why he went on to rape her on Dec 30.

SINGAPORE: The wife of a doctor accused of raping a female patient in 2015 took the witness stand on Wednesday (Jul 11) and said that she had difficulty having sex with her husband that year in new testimony that the prosecution alleged was "an afterthought" to help her husband's defence.

Madam Quek Bee Nar, a real estate agent, gave evidence in the High Court through a Chinese interpreter.

She has been married to general practitioner Wee Teong Boo for 40 years, the court heard, and they have five children aged 20 to 39.

Wee, 67, is accused of raping a female patient, then 23, in a late night consultation on Dec 30, 2015, at his Bedok clinic.

READ: Doctor accused of raping patient goes on trialThe victim, who cannot be named due to a gag order, made a police report the day after the alleged crime took place.

Advertisement

Madam Quek had given a condition statement signed May 24 this year about the day's events, which was read in court on Wednesday.

In it, she detailed how her husband arrived home on Dec 31, 2015, accompanied by Assistant Superintendent Razali Razak, and was later taken to the Police Cantonment Complex.

She also described the phone calls her husband made to her later that day, saying he was going to be detained in the police lock-up.

A few days later in early January 2016, Madam Quek went down to the Police Cantonment Complex and gave a statement to a police officer.

On Wednesday, Madam Quek asked for new points to be added to her condition statement dated May 24, 2018.

Among these statements were two points that the prosecution cross-examined her on: First, that she had been told by ASP Razali in January 2016 that her husband may be charged with rape, and second, that another police officer had asked her about her sex life with her husband while taking her statement that same month.

The prosecution found that there were inconsistencies between Madam Quek's condition statement and the oral additions she gave in court on Wednesday and accused her of lying to help her husband.

However, Justice Chua Lee Ming dismissed the prosecution's application to impeach her as a witness, saying that any inconsistency was not sufficiently material for an impeachment.

"VERY FAST"

Madam Quek told the court that the police officer who took her statement in January 2016 had asked her about her sex life with her husband.

"I said 'very fast'," Madam Quek said. "He asked me what that meant. I said 'he's old'. I didn't say in detail why it was 'fast', because he was a male police officer."

When questioned by defence counsel Edmond Pereira, Madam Quek said that she had sex with her husband about once or twice a month in 2015.

She explained that in 2015, when her husband wanted to have sex with her, his penis would be "soft like a noodle" and he needed to use his hand to guide himself. He also had difficulty maintaining and achieving an erection, she said.

Wee had told the court in May that he had been seen by a urologist for erectile dysfunction and low libido.